Indian Evidence Act, 1872 | S. 34

* Entries in the books of account – Proof- Mere statement of firm without supporting vouchers or receipts or bills – Plaintiff failed to prove transaction.
(2000 (3) GCD 2485 , Rambhai Ranchod v. Chotabhai Khandubhai) Pars

* Word ‘Books’ – meaning of – spiral pads and spiral note books – are ‘Books’ within meaning of S.34 but not loose sheets of papers – contained in files.
AIR 1998 SC 1406 (CBI v. V.C. Shukla)

* Books of account – ledger consisting of bundle of sheets separable conveniently is not a book of account – even bound ledger book itself has no evidentry value.
AIR 1981 Bombay 446 (Zenna Sorabji v. Mirabelle Hotel Co. )

* Where the books produced are merely the ledgers not supported by any day book or roznama containing no entries of the transaction as they take place and there is no daily opening and closing balance in the ledger accounts but what was shown from those books was that there was plaintiffs account and in that account entries were made and those entires could all have been made on any one day, these books do not fulfill the requirements of S.34 and be regarded as relevant under the section.
AIR 1952 Assam 92 (Chandi Ram Deka v. Jamini Kant Deka)

* If the account books and the entires made therein are of suspicious character, or do not inspire confidence in a court of justice, they should not be relied upon.
AIR 1978 Karnataka 10

* The account books cannot be said to be properly proved when the munibs who wrote them, though alive have not been produced.
AIR 1942 Oudh 155 (Lachmi Narain v. L. Musaddi Lal)

* Where the accounts consists of loose sheets of papers they cannot have the same probative force of account books which are regularly kept in the course of business. Where the signature of a particular person is not in issue or sought to be established, S. 90 cannot apply even if the accounts are old and produced from the proper custody.
AIR 1953 SC 431 (Mahassay Ganesh v. Narendra Nath Sen